If your definition of "good economics" includes Adam Smith and excludes Paul Samuelson, it is at best incomplete.
If it calls the second half of the twentieth century, a time of tremendous advances in economics science, a "mistaken path" - then there are probably major problems with it.
I personally tire of getting told that we do bad economics or that we have somehow abandoned the economics of Smith.
Debt, Diversion, Distraction
2 hours ago